What to do? What to do?

brentbrent wrote:

NCV wrote:

I have the same problem. The 12-100 would be the logical solution for travel, but I just cannot bear to part with my 12-35 2.8 and the 35-100 2.8 that I use with two bodies. I love these two lenses for their compactness and IQ.

I went from these three lenses: 12-35 f/2.8, 35-100 f/2.8, and 14-140 v.II

to

these two lenses: 12-100 and 12-35 f/2.8.

My rationale: I like having a superzoom for daylight outings, trips, etc. After shooting with the 12-100 at a camera demo day, I found it clearly superior to the 14-140 in IQ (and it's weather resistant, has constant max f/4, goes to 12mm, manual focus clutch, and is just a jewel of a lens). I can live without the 100mm to 140mm range for this kind of use.

I guess it all depends on the kind of photography you do. For regular travel pics, I would agree, but since I like to do wildlife photography too, I am reluctant to give up the extra range.

Selling the 35-100 was a bit harder, but I decided that much of what I would use it for could be handled by the 12-100. For indoor event shooting, f/2.8 beats f/4, but I also have the 75 f/1.8 for that.

Yes, shooting indoors is nice with f/2.8.

But I'm definitely keeping the 12-35, which is smaller, lighter, faster than the 12-100 and would be all that is needed for many occasions. I suggest that the OP consider keeping his 12-40 if he does decide to go with the 12-100.

The OP is a she !!! 🙂 and I agree that it would be hard to part with the 12-40.

If you're willing to carry two bodies, keeping the 12-35 and the 35-100 sorta makes sense, but having that full 12-100 range in one truly excellent lens is liberating.

Thanks for your advice.